From e3bfee32cb9b25f8b8db8b11b52e7fe4612c36f3 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: James Ray Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2017 14:54:31 +1100 Subject: [PATCH] often *they* can tolerate less than a third *of* Byzantine faults --- papers/CasperTFG/CasperTFG.tex | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/papers/CasperTFG/CasperTFG.tex b/papers/CasperTFG/CasperTFG.tex index ab65dc7..9e05074 100644 --- a/papers/CasperTFG/CasperTFG.tex +++ b/papers/CasperTFG/CasperTFG.tex @@ -84,7 +84,7 @@ Blockchain consensus protocols like Bitcoin do not finalize/decide on one block Traditional consensus protocol research has focused on producing protocols that are asynchronously safe (i.e.\ blocks won't be reverted due to arbitrary timing of future events) and live in asynchrony (or partial synchrony) (i.e.\ nodes eventually decide on new blocks). On the other hand, the Bitcoin blockchain is not safe in an asynchonous network but is safe and live (for unknown block-depth or ``confirmation count'') in a ``partially synchronous network.'' -Traditional Byzantine fault tolerant consensus protocols have precisely stated Byzantine fault tolerance numbers (often can tolerate less than a third Byzantine faults, or up to $t$ faults when there are $3t + 1$ nodes)[CITE]. On the other hand, it is less clear exactly how many faults (measured as a proportion of hashrate) the Bitcoin blockchain protocol can tolerate. +Traditional Byzantine fault tolerant consensus protocols have precisely stated Byzantine fault tolerance numbers (often they can tolerate less than a third of Byzantine faults, or up to $t$ faults when there are $3t + 1$ nodes)[CITE]. On the other hand, it is less clear exactly how many faults (measured as a proportion of hashrate) the Bitcoin blockchain protocol can tolerate. \subsection{Overview of the Work Presented}